No Evidence Prevails Unless ‘Conclusive, Convincing, and Beyond Reasonable Doubt’: Calcutta High Court Modifies Assault Convictions” "Fraudulent Intentions Clear as Day": Rajasthan High Court Denies Bail in ₹40 Crore Commodity Trading Scam Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Bail to Former Minister in Money Laundering Case Mere Apology Insufficient to Negate Criminal Liability for Cyber Harassment: Madras High Court Mere Criminal Antecedents Not Sufficient to Deny Bail; Long Incarceration and Completion of Investigation Warrant Bail: Kerala High Court Justice Cannot Be Denied When Plaintiff Proves Right, Title, and Interest in Property, Says Calcutta High Court Permanent Injunction Granted Against Government for Failure to Follow Mandatory Rule 3 Notice: Andhra Pradesh High Court Circumstantial Evidence Must Form an Unbroken Chain: P&H High Court Validates Conviction under Sections 302/34 IPC "Right to Be Forgotten Must Prevail Over Freedom of Expression in Acquittal Cases," Rules Delhi High Court Unjust Enrichment Cannot Be the Characteristic of a Government: Kerala High Court Orders 12% Interest on Delayed Payments Vague and Omnibus Statements Cannot Sustain Criminal Prosecution: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Alleging Cruelty and Forced Miscarriage State Law Governs Court Fees Refunds in Mediation Settlements, But Refund Allowed as Discretionary Relief: Supreme Court Death Was Homicidal, Not Suicidal: Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Wife's Murder Case Land Compensation | Market Value Determined by the Reference Court Is Lawful and Reasonable: Andhra Pradesh High Court Cal High Court Quashes Wilful Defaulter Declarations, Cites Procedural Violations and Unreliable Evidence Taxation Law | When tax liability arises solely due to retrospective amendments, waiver of interest is warranted: Punjab and Haryana High Court Civil Authorities Not Required to Be Impleaded in Bail Applications: Supreme Court Clarifies Bail Procedures for Foreign Nationals Compensation Must Address Long-Term Needs and Recovery: Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Accident Victim to ₹48 Lakhs Criminal Law Cannot Be Misused for Civil Matters: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against MLA in Goa Property Dispute Minor Contradictions in Testimonies Not Sufficient to Overturn Convictions: Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Kerala Political Clash Murder Case

In the Realm of Doubts and Discrepancies, Innocence Prevails: Supreme Court Acquits In Child Murder Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court today overturned the High Court’s conviction of Kalinga in the 2002 murder case of a child, citing significant inconsistencies in circumstantial evidence and the unreliability of an extra-judicial confession.

The apex court critically examined the evidentiary value of circumstantial evidence and extra-judicial confessions in criminal cases, emphasizing the necessity of a coherent and conclusive chain of circumstances to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The case involved the mysterious death of 2.5-year-old Hrithik in 2002. Kalinga, the appellant, faced conviction by the High Court based on an extra-judicial confession and circumstantial evidence, despite being acquitted by the Trial Court. The Supreme Court was tasked with evaluating the consistency and reliability of the confession and the overall circumstantial evidence.

Extra-Judicial Confession: The court noted significant discrepancies in the testimony of PW-1, the father of the deceased, concerning the confession. The absence of key witnesses during the confession raised doubts about its existence and credibility.

Circumstantial Evidence: The apex court identified several discrepancies in the chain of circumstances, including uncertainties about the identity of the deceased’s body, arrest procedures, and the theory of the body’s recovery. These inconsistencies led the court to deem the circumstantial evidence insufficient to conclusively establish guilt.

Reversal of Acquittal Standards: Highlighting the principles governing the reversal of acquittals, the Supreme Court criticized the High Court’s approach in re-appreciating evidence without identifying any perversity or illegality in the Trial Court’s order, reaffirming the reinforced presumption of innocence after acquittal.

Decision: Overruling the High Court’s judgment and reinstating the Trial Court’s acquittal, the Supreme Court acquitted Kalinga of all charges. The judgment underscored the importance of resolving doubts in favor of the accused and adhering to the principle of reasonable doubt in criminal jurisprudence.

Date of Decision: February 20, 2024

Kalinga @ Kushal Vs. State of Karnataka by Police Inspector Hubli

 

 

Similar News